LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-31-2005, 06:48 AM   #1
codec
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: mad.es.eu
Distribution: ubuntu 5.04 knoppix Slack91/10 freebsd51 vector4 redhat9
Posts: 304

Rep: Reputation: 30
select a free license?


I would like to release my POS software which has some commercial value.

Our business use a localized commercial product which cost us 400 euros. it locking up the keyboard, lack features and work in windows only. That's why my program is developed, it use some interesting modern technology.

I believe that open the source could bring some future to this program. However, I am stingy. I would like to put some restrictions:
- As the original developer, I would not like to see other people copy my software and sell it. They may charge service for installation or maintenance by not selling the software.
- Freely available in form of source code or binary package. I should be the copyright owner and they should not remove the copyright notice.
- Free to modify, but I hope that it would not branched off without my permission so I hope that modifications would be submitted.
- Although I don't think it would be the case. I would like to reserve the right to sell a commercial license at minimal cost of about 20 euros if a reseller want to bundle it with hardware. I would like to take the adventages of submitted modifications even if it go commercial in the future. The free version and commercial version would have no difference except the license.

What kind of license should I use? MPL+commercial? If I use MPL+commercial, then it could not be hosted on sf, right?

Last edited by codec; 05-31-2005 at 06:50 AM.
 
Old 05-31-2005, 06:59 AM   #2
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
Moved: Asking what type of license you should use for your software is not a Linux technical question. More suitable in our General forum.
 
Old 06-01-2005, 01:03 AM   #3
AlexV
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: New Lenox, IL
Distribution: Fedora Core 4; Ubuntu 5.10 (Breezy Preview); CentOS 4
Posts: 81

Rep: Reputation: 15
Sounds like a plain GPL license would be fine for your needs.

As the copyright holder you could release the free (as in freedom) version under the GPL, and also offer the program it under a different, proprietary license. I believe several popular open source programs are licensed this way (Qt, MySQL, etc.)
 
Old 06-01-2005, 02:43 AM   #4
scuzzman
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Hilliard, Ohio, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Kubuntu
Posts: 1,851

Rep: Reputation: 47
Quote:
Free to modify, but I hope that it would not branched off without my permission so I hope that modifications would be submitted.
This negates the GPL unless it's just a simple request that isn't legaly binding.
 
Old 06-01-2005, 04:08 AM   #5
trey85stang
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,090

Rep: Reputation: 41
Just go proprietary.. if it is good like you say.. make some money off it. GPL it later.
 
Old 06-01-2005, 08:42 AM   #6
KimVette
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Lee, NH
Distribution: OpenSUSE, CentOS, RHEL
Posts: 1,794

Rep: Reputation: 46
If you say it can't be branched off, how is it open source? You can't use the GPL for that product. You might want to go the dual-licensing route as others have mentioned - it's working for the Qt libraries, KDE, mysql, SugarCRM and countless other products, so it may well be worth considering.

Don't be surprised if another company pops up with a better version though - look at SugarCRM (an EXCELLENT product) and vTiger (an even better one!) for example. It can serve as incentive to keep you on your toes and keep the product extremely polished, but if you're lazy or if you lower the priority of the project, it can spell the end of income from that particular product.
 
Old 06-06-2005, 08:51 AM   #7
codec
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: mad.es.eu
Distribution: ubuntu 5.04 knoppix Slack91/10 freebsd51 vector4 redhat9
Posts: 304

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
it seems that MPL is probably the better one. By sharing the commercial interest to others, I can get back the modified code. It's a fair license and the project would evolve better than GPL.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
the GNU Free Documentation License (the GPL for books)? case1984 Linux - General 3 05-25-2007 03:39 PM
Powerpack and free download edition LICENSE konfigure Mandriva 5 08-08-2005 02:14 AM
Select() did not select my socket thvo Programming 1 05-08-2005 12:20 AM
Which free documentation license should I use? darthtux General 1 12-07-2003 12:17 AM
Free, free,FREE=? no money, = Freedom? murshed Linux - Newbie 8 01-20-2003 07:01 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration